linux-kernel - Re: If not readdir() then what?

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Tue, 10 Apr 2007 07:10:48 -0700
From:	"Ulrich Drepper" <drepper@...il.com>
To:	"Theodore Tso" <tytso@....edu>,
	"Trond Myklebust" <trond.myklebust@....uio.no>,
	"Jörn Engel" <joern@...ybastard.org>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
	"Christoph Hellwig" <hch@...radead.org>,
	"Ulrich Drepper" <drepper@...il.com>,
	"Linux Kernel Mailing List" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"Neil Brown" <neilb@...e.de>
Subject: Re: If not readdir() then what?

On 4/10/07, Theodore Tso <tytso@....edu> wrote:
> That might work.  But if in the long term we want to separate out what
> we can send back via telldir/seekdir, and some future new Posix
> interface, [...]

With all these discussions about fixes for telldir, do we want to
persue an alternative interface where the user can explicitly specify
that no telldir/seekdir will ever be used?  From what I know so far it
would make technical sense since we could speed up/reduce the memory
footprint of readdir in 99% of most programs.  But is the benefit
large enough to warrant a second interface?
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/